In re Micci

—Per Curiam.

By decision dated December 19, 1995, this Court found that respondent had been convicted of a serious crime as that term is defined in Judiciary Law § 90 (4) (d), suspended him from practice until such time as a final disciplinary order is entered, and ordered him to show cause why a final disciplinary order should not be made (Matter of Micci, 222 AD2d 888). As noted in the decision, respondent was convicted, upon his plea of guilty, in the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut, of three counts of making false statements to a Federally-insured financial…